Press Release

Response of the California High Speed Rail Authority 

to the Report of the Legislative Peer Review Group 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- The California High Speed Rail Authority has reviewed the report submitted today to the California Legislature by the California High Speed Rail Peer Review Group.    

While some of the recommendations in the Peer Review Group report merit consideration, by and large this report is deeply flawed, in some areas misleading and its conclusions are unfounded.    

Unfortunately, many of the most egregious errors and unsupported assertions would have been avoided with even minimal consultation with the CHSRA. Although some high-speed rail experience exists among Peer Review Panel members this report suffers from a lack of appreciation of how high speed rail systems have been constructed throughout the world, makes unrealistic and unsubstantiated assumptions about private sector involvement in such systems and ignores or misconstrues the legal requirements that govern the construction of the high speed rail program in California.  

In recommending against proceeding with the high speed rail development “at this time,” the Report ignores many components of the CHRSA’s recent Draft Business Plan and attempts to promulgate a new standard of project feasibility that is inconsistent with national funding of transportation projects.   

The report’s conclusions, which would be premature at best, would place at risk $3.5 billion of federal funding for High Speed Rail currently in hand for the project and undermine extensive outreach efforts on the part of the Authority to develop greater integration with regional rail systems.    

Consequently, the Authority believes this report does not provide a sound basis for critiquing the Authority’s Finance plan, nor for the public policy choices facing the Legislature. 

“It is unfortunate that the Peer Review Committee has delivered a report to the Legislature that is deeply flawed in its understanding of the Authority’s program and the experience around the world in successfully developing high speed rail,” said Roelof van Ark, CEO of the High Speed Rail Authority.   “As someone involved in many of the successful high speed rail programs internationally, I can say that the recommendations of this Committee simply do not reflect a real world view of what it takes to bring such projects to fruition.” 

“We take seriously legitimate critiques of our program and organization,” added Thomas J. Umberg, Chairman of the Authority Board.  “For example, we have acknowledged repeatedly that the Authority must staff up in anticipation of start of construction next year.”   “However,” he added,  “what is most unfortunate about this Report’s faulty assumptions and lack of analysis is that it erroneously creates a cloud over the program that threatens not only federal support but also the confidence of the private sector necessary for them to invest their dollars.” 

Thomas Fellenz, Chief Counsel of the Authority noted:  “The Report makes unfounded assumptions about the consistency of the Authority’s plans with Proposition 1A, the High Speed Rail bond measure.    Frankly, not only are these legal conclusions beyond the expertise of the authors, but attorneys at the state and federal government level and the legislative author of the bond measure, profoundly disagree.   All have expressed confidence that our Financing Plan is consistent with the bond measure.  Ironically, several other recommendations of the Peer Review Committee are directly contrary to the plain language of Proposition 1A and could not be implemented by the Authority.”  

Information about the Legislative Peer Review Group and their reports can be found on their website at  http://www.cahsrprg.com/index.html